- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by DimensionalFusion talk 16:01, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Liebigs Annalen
- ... that scientists publishing in Liebigs Annalen were subject to criticism and attacks by editor Justus von Liebig?
- Source: Partington, James Riddick (1961). A history of chemistry. London : Macmillan ; New York : St. Martin's Press. p. 299. ISBN 978-0-333-08366-6.
- ALT1: ... that Liebigs Annalen was first published in English 163 years after its first issue? Source: Engberts, Jan B. F. N.; Hafner, Klaus; Hopf, Henning (September 20, 1997). Temme, Robert (ed.). "What is going to become of Chemische Berichte/Recueil and Liebigs Annalen/Recueil?" (PDF). Jahrgang. Archived (PDF) from the original on May 28, 2024. Retrieved July 2, 2024., Royal Society of London (1 January 1875). "Obituary Notices of Fellows Deceased". Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. 24: xxvii–xxxvii. Retrieved 5 February 2024.
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/The Eternaut
- Comment: ALT1 uses the first source for its first English publication year and second source for the start of publications year.
Improved to Good Article status by Reconrabbit (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.
Reconrabbit 15:37, 20 August 2024 (UTC).
Article new enough (promoted to GA August 17); long enough (7600 B); sourced; GA status, so no copyvio or other issues. ALT0 verified in source and cited inline. ALT1 verified in sources, but article does not mention the span of 163 years (even if that is a simple calculation). I think ALT1 would have to be tweaked to say the years of 1832 and 1995. Approving both hooks, with the aforementioned caveat. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 16:46, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
